November 28, 2000

10:29 AM

Uh, oh. The price of protest is eternal vigilance, or something. Perhaps Ms. Hill was too busy flogging her book. No, seriously -- if one were to make a deal with Satan, would one really expect him to keep his side of the bargain?
posted by dcehr (18 comments total)

I'm glad. That stupid idiot got way too much press for hanging out in that tree...
posted by owillis at 1:15 PM on November 28, 2000

this is so sad... i *just* got finished reading her book. while i don't know that i could ever do anything like that, i do appreciate her willing to take a stand for something she believed in fervently.
posted by sugarfish at 1:22 PM on November 28, 2000

And why exactly was she a stupid idiot, owillis? Would you have preferred her becoming a place kicker?
posted by gluechunk at 1:26 PM on November 28, 2000

How can you be glad owillis? I can understand indifferent, but glad?

Whatever.
posted by alan at 1:30 PM on November 28, 2000

Does anybody else think it's ironic that her book is printed on dead trees?
I did not approve of the protest, but felt a wave of shock and sadness when I saw a picture of the tree. Could they pipe some epoxy into the trunk and save the it? It doesn't seem like it has to fall.
posted by thirteen at 1:37 PM on November 28, 2000

She'd have done a lot more good as a placekicker, that's for sure.
posted by owillis at 1:59 PM on November 28, 2000

Depends on who gets to be the football.
posted by frykitty at 2:39 PM on November 28, 2000

photos here
posted by sudama at 2:44 PM on November 28, 2000

All trees fall eventually kids. Lets not get to emotional.
posted by davidgentle at 5:05 PM on November 28, 2000

davidgentle:
All trees fall eventually kids. Lets not get to emotional.

Sure, all trees die, just like everything else. But when something beautiful is destroyed, especially when it's destroyed on purpose by vandals, anyone who appreciates its beauty is perfectly justified in feeling upset. Taking a chainsaw to an ancient redwood is like dynamiting a cathedral or ransacking the Louvre with a razor knife.

It isn't like this tree lived out its life, got old, and is now dying because its time is over. It still had centuries left.

-Mars
posted by Mars Saxman at 6:24 PM on November 28, 2000

Makes me chuckle. Why do I have this feeling that Miss Tree Squatter strapped on an Echo chain saw and created some press for her book 'printed on dead trees'?
posted by chiXy at 6:26 PM on November 28, 2000

You have this feeling, chiXy, because you are ignorant of the situation.

Julia Butterfly Hill may be flaky, or have a screwed up sense of priorities, or whatever. But she was willing to make a great personal sacrifice for something that she believed in. That is deserving of respect and admiration, whether you feel that she accomplished anything worthwhile or not.

I'm honestly puzzled as to what enjoyment anyone could get from hearing that something that meant a great deal to someone was destroyed.
posted by Optamystic at 6:45 PM on November 28, 2000

All trees fall eventually kids

yes, and all people die eventually. so it's fine if someone takes your life before you're ready to give it up?

this tree is in my backyard (well, within a half hour of my backyard). while the local media would have you believe that there are two clearly defined sides ("hippy tree-huggers" vs. "redneck loggers") in this 'battle', my view is somewhat different. i have friends who have been loggers for 20 years, and yet care deeply about preserving the shrinking old growth stands. i also have friends who are staunch environmentalists, but who also happen to have a great deal of compassion for humanity. of course, i also know a few stereotypically redneck loggers and ultra-radical eco-terrorists. i'm guessing most sane people are neither.

it doesn't bother me that her book was printed on 'dead trees', since it's likely that recycled paper was used. even if it wasn't recycled, i can practically guarantee that the wood used to produce the paper did not come from 1,000 year old timber. yes, luna is estimated to be around 1,000 yrs old, and it's probably safe to say that it would still be standing for at least a few more hundred years, if not for this stupid act of vandalism. and i think the majority of environmentalists (the more rational ones, at least) are not so hypocritical as to claim they live a paper/wood product-free existence (although you can buy hemp toilet paper at the store around the corner!).

interestingly, some of the people who formerly supported hill are now denouncing her, claiming her newfound fame and self-serving attitude are at odds with her original vision and 'the cause'.

today's local paper reports that a 'group of experts are trying to determine the best course of action' for repairing or shoring up the tree. i haven't heard anything about how it fared in last night's rain and high winds though. and i did see several downed trees on the drive to work this morning.
posted by modge at 1:15 PM on November 29, 2000

Taking a chainsaw to an ancient redwood is like dynamiting a cathedral or ransacking the Louvre with a razor knife.

Well, no. In the cases of dynamiting cathedrals or razor-blading the Louvre, you're destroying something that someone (actually, a large number of someones) put actual work into. But whose hard work is destroyed when you vandalize a tree? The two situations are analogous only at the most superficial level, i.e. "something pretty got messed up."

Julia Butterfly Hill may be flaky, or have a screwed up sense of priorities, or whatever. But she was willing to make a great personal sacrifice for something that she believed in. That is deserving of respect and admiration, whether you feel that she accomplished anything worthwhile or not.

Only things worth doing are deserving of respect when they have been accomplished. The purity of the motivation of any given fruitcake ought to be completely irrelevant to whether other people think well of them. If I were to make it my mission to eradicate all homosexuals from the face of the Earth, I daresay there's no level of "personal sacrifice" that could redeem me.
posted by kindall at 2:32 PM on November 29, 2000

kindall: ...analogous only at the most superficial level, i.e. "something pretty got messed up." is exactly what i thought Mars was trying to say, hence his use of the word "like" as opposed to "the same".

and comparing a person who is trying to save a tree to someone who would make it their mission "to eradicate all homosexuals from the face of the Earth" seems like a bit of a superficial analogy itself. unless you happen to believe trees (or things of beauty - subjective, i know) are useless or inherently evil.

i don't see what it has to do with 'someone's hard work'...
posted by modge at 3:29 PM on November 29, 2000

In the cases of dynamiting cathedrals or razor-blading the Louvre, you're destroying something that someone (actually, a large number of someones) put actual work into. But whose hard work is destroyed when you vandalize a tree?

You're missing the point. The destruction of something beautiful and rare is reasonable cause for sadness whether it was made by humans or not. This particular beautiful rarity happens to be alive, which makes its destruction even more distressing.

-Mars


posted by Mars Saxman at 5:00 PM on November 29, 2000

Optamystic:
"You have this feeling, chiXy, because you are ignorant of the situation."
Uh yeah... that's a REAL difficult situation to grasp. Thanks for the enlightenment. I understand my 'feelings' better now. <./sarcasm>

I think what she DID was ridiculous-- not what she stood for. And I would not call what she did a "great personal sacrifice".

eof
posted by chiXy at 8:32 AM on November 30, 2000